Sources: Bibliographic data for sources cited may be found at the end of the
article. Unless otherwise indicated Scripture quotations are taken from
the NASB Updated Edition (1995).

Terminology: In order to emphasize the Jewish nature and message of the apostolic
writings (New Testament) I use the terms Yeshua (Jesus),
Messiah (Christ), and Tanakh (Old Testament), and incorporate other
appropriate Hebrew and Jewish terms. (See the
Glossary.)

An article of faith in orthodox Christian theology is that Yeshua (Jesus) will return to earth.
Disciples of Yeshua just don't agree when it will
occur. The timing of the Second Coming is usually defined in
relation to two other time periods, the millennium and the great
tribulation. Many Evangelicals believe that Yeshua will return secretly
before the great tribulation and "rapture" or remove believers from the
earth, take them to heaven to enjoy the marriage feast of the Lamb while
the world suffers and then return publicly seven years later to establish His reign. It is the view of this author that
Yeshua will not return for His disciples until after all prophecy has
been fulfilled, including the great
tribulation. Below are brief comments on critical Scripture passages related to the timing of
Yeshua's return.

A Challenge to Study

My passion for
studying the Second Coming and related last days events began with a
serious discussion with a fellow college student in 1965. As a teenager
in the church I had been taught the Dispensational doctrine of the secret
rapture. I had accepted this
view without critical analysis until this conversation. My friend
challenged me to prove from Scripture that the Rapture would occur before
the great tribulation and that it would be done secretly. He did not try to convince me by arguing from
Scripture, but relied on my own study to come to the same conclusion he
had.

I immediately began to pour over the New Testament, reading and
rereading every passage that speaks of these events without resorting to
commentaries or other books on the subject. After several weeks of study
I concluded that I could not prove the pretribulation theory beyond a
reasonable doubt. Moreover, I came to the surprising conclusion that
events would occur just the opposite and that the Rapture, resurrection
and Second Coming were all part of the same event that would occur on one
day.

Perhaps the most
persuasive Scripture for me is in the Olivet Discourse. When the
disciples asked Yeshua the “when” question (Matt 24:3), they didn’t
expect to hear about a coming in the clouds. The disciples were
ready to establish the Messiah’s kingdom and they could not figure
out what was taking Yeshua so long to “come” into Jerusalem and
claim the throne. In His long answer on the subject of His (second)
coming and the end of the age, Yeshua replied quite simply and
succinctly “after the tribulation” (Matt 24:29).

Over the years
I’ve had conversations with many who accept the pretribulationism they’ve
been taught, but when they have to defend it they
realize there are cogent arguments for not believing in pretribulationism
and invariably retreat into “pan-millennialism” (however the Rapture and
Second Coming occur, it will all “pan” out in the end). Obviously, not
every theory of the end times can be right, but, fortunately, salvation is
not based on believing the right theory about eschatology.

Disciples of Yeshua should consider the effect of discovering in the light of events that
there is no secret rapture. Posttribulationists and pre-wrath advocates would be
ecstatic if the Rapture occurred as predicted by the pretribulationists. The same
probably couldn't be said of many pretribulationists who have made a
strong spiritual investment in the doctrine. Some pretribulationists might
actually abandon the faith, having assumed it to be a key article in their
total belief system.

If pretribulationism isn’t true, then what about the
rest of Christian doctrine, even the Gospel itself. And, if there are
those, weak in faith, that do fall away because of having to face the
wrath of the Antichrist, then what accountability would the teachers of
pretribulationism bear before the judgment bar of God? I shudder to
think.

Therefore, I issue
the same challenge. Study the Scriptures for yourself. For all the end
time prophecies and passages, ask these questions. What does the
verse/passage say? What does it not say? What is its straightforward
meaning? What would the apostles have understood Yeshua to mean in light
of their own expectations of establishing the Kingdom of God? What does
the passage actually assert vs. what may be inferred or assumed? What message does the passage have for personal
application? What sort of people ought we to be as we wait for the Day
of the Lord and the blessed Second Coming of our Messiah? (2 Pet 3:11)

The Meaning of Parousia

The principal Greek word
used in the New Testament for Yeshua's "coming" is parousia, (pronounced ‘pah-roo-see-ah’)
which means presence, coming or advent (BAG). A review of all the
passages where parousia occurs will demonstrate that it has a
variety of characteristics. The word parousia occurs in
1 Thessalonians 4:15 and in context there are these elements:

· Those who have died in
the Lord will be resurrected before the living.

· Yeshua will
descend from heaven with a shout.

· Yeshua will
descend with the voice of the archangel.

· The living
will be caught up to be with Yeshua and with the resurrected saints in the
clouds.

Other passages add
these elements:

· The parousia of
the Son of Man will be as the lightning flashes from east to west (Matt
24:27).

· The parousia of
the Son of Man will take place after the great tribulation (Matt
24:29-30).

· At the parousia the elect will be gathered from the four winds and from one
end of the heavens to the other (Matt 24.29-31).

· The objects
of God's wrath in the parousia will be like Noah's generation who
did not understand until the flood took them all away (Matt 24:37, 39).

· The parousia is followed by
Yeshua delivering the kingdom to His Father and
all human rule and authority is abolished (1 Cor 15:23-25).

· God will
establish our hearts unblameable in holiness with all His saints at the parousia (1 Thess. 3:13).

· The parousia and the Day of the Lord are viewed as one and the same event.
(2 Thess 2:1-2) The Apostle Peter likewise links the parousia and
the Day of the Lord (2 Pet 3:4, 10).

· Yeshua will
slay the lawless one with the breath of His mouth at His parousia.
(2 Thess 2:8)

· Coincidental with the
parousia the heavens and the earth will
suffer the judgment of fire. (2 Pet 3:12)

When all these passages
are taken together it is clear that the parousia contains many
elements, some of which are assigned by pretribulationists to the secret
return of Yeshua (the “Rapture”) and others to the visible return of
Yeshua. A straightforward reading of Scripture requires there be only one parousia
and NO passage depicts the parousia as lasting any significant
amount of time or divided into a secret coming and a public coming
separated by 3½ or 7 years.

A significant argument in favor of the
posttribulation view may be found in the “gathering” parables involving
field, fish and flock employed by John the Immerser and Yeshua. John the
Immerser by divine revelation was given a vision of the future and used the
first gathering parable to describe the beginning and the end of the last
days.

“He who is coming after me is mightier than I,
and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy
Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will
thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into
the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” (Matt
3:12)

The straightforward
meaning of John’s parable is that the wheat symbolizes the righteous and
the chaff refers to the unrighteous as in Psalm 1. The last days would
begin with Pentecost and end with the Parousia. The Greek
word originally meant to dip, soak or immerse in liquid so that what is
dipped takes on the qualities of what it has been dipped in (Stern 15). Associating “baptize” with Holy Spirit would imply being infused with the
character of God and empowered for a life of service to God. Such was the Pentecost
experience. However, to baptize with fire, rather than portending the
tongues of fire at Pentecost, more likely refers to suffering and
tribulation that disciples could expect (cf. Mark 9:49; 10:38; 1 Cor
3:13-15).

John prophesied that
a great harvest would occur. The Messiah will gather the wheat, his
righteous ones, and burn up the chaff, the wicked who oppose his rule. The mention of
unquenchable fire refers to the final judgment. Yeshua later defined
“unquenchable fire” as a chief characteristic of hell (Mark 9:43-44). Also,
in John’s parable the One mightier than he would use a winnowing fork,
parallel to the use of the sickle in Revelation 14:14-16, and both
harvesting and winnowing are accomplished in the same event.

Yeshua told two gathering parables that
have the same elements as found in John’s parable. In the
parable of the wheat and tares (Matt 13:24-30), Yeshua substituted tares
for the chaff and reversed the order of the gathering description. However,
Yeshua adds the detail of using reapers, i.e. the angels, to do
the actual gathering to whom He says, "First gather up the tares and bind
them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn" (Matt
13:30). In the explanation of the parable that follows in Matthew
13:36-43, Yeshua makes it clear that the field is the world, the tares are
the sons of the devil, or the stumbling blocks in His earthly kingdom and
the wheat is the righteous. Both sons of the devil and the righteous are
"gathered" at the same time, with judgment rendered as in the other
parables (Matt 13:42-43).

The identical pattern follows in
the parable of the dragnet of fish in Matthew 13:47-50 with good and bad
fish hauled onto the shore at the same time in one large net. The fish
are then separated with a similar outcome as in the parable of the wheat
and tares. Yeshua emphasizes that the righteous and unrighteous are
gathered together in the same time event and then the wicked are separated
from the righteous. It is
interesting that Yeshua explains all the elements of these two parables
except the “barn” in the first (Matt 13:30) and the “containers” in
the second (Matt 13:48). The description of the New Jerusalem in
Revelation 21 might well qualify as the “barn” from a structural point
of view and the “containers” may correspond to the many rooms of John
14:2.

The
obvious fact of these analogies drawn from the farming and fishing
practices is that time is of the essence in accomplishing the gathering
and preserving. No farmer would harvest grain and then wait 3 or 7
years before he winnowed and placed it in his barn. Similarly, the
fisherman has to act quickly to get the "good" fish to market. The
straightforward meaning of these parables is that the similarity between
the story details and the Second Coming also applies to the time required
to accomplish the work.

Perhaps the key passage on which
pretribulationists rely to support their theory that the rapture is a
secret event and one that can occur any time before the Antichrist appears
is this mysterious saying in the Olivet Discourse:

“For
the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as
in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying
and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and
they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so
will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then there will be two men in the
field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be
grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left” (Matt
24:37-41).

Yeshua uses the analogy of Noah and the
global flood, as well as the rescue of Lot from doomed Sodom (Luke
17:28-30), to describe His coming. Noah was told 120 years before the fact that God would
destroy the world and he did his best to
warn his neighbors (Gen 6:3; 2 Pet 2:5). Noah had plenty of time to get
ready. Lot didn’t know until the angels showed up and he had little time to get
his family out of town. However, Noah didn’t know the actual day or hour he
was to enter the ark until God told him and shut him in (Gen 7:1, 15-16).
We, too, don’t know the day or hour (Mark 13:32).

The reference to the activities of
that time stresses the preoccupation of people to the things of this world
to the neglect of their relationship with God. They simply could not
believe that God would destroy them. Thus, the people of Noah’s day were spiritually
unprepared to meet their Creator. Yeshua succinctly recounts that the
flood came and “took them all away” (Matt 24:39).

The obvious fact that
has a direct bearing on the Second Coming is that the deliverance of the
saints occurred on the same day as God’s judgment on the wicked (Gen
6:11, 13; Matt 24:38). In Lot’s case he was aided by angels. We, too will be rescued from
the wrath to come (1 Thess 1:10) and the angels will assist us in that time
(2 Thess 1:7). If the coming of the Son of Man will be
like the days of Noah and Lot, then deliverance of the saints and
destruction of the wicked will occur on the same day, not seven or 3½ years
apart. This is essentially the message of 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10.

After saying His coming would be like the days of Noah and Lot, Yeshua went
on to describe some be taken and others left.
The Greek word paralambanō, translated “taken” in verses 40 and
41, means to “take to oneself, take with or along, or to receive (BAG). It is the same
word Yeshua used in John 14:3 to come and receive His disciples, “If I go and
prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that
where I am, there you may be also.” When Yeshua returns He will take His
people to Himself in the air, 1 Thess 4:17. The Greek
word aphiêmi, translated "left," has a broad range of meaning, but in
this context means to leave or to abandon because of its obvious contrast to
“taken.”

It should
be noted what Yeshua did not say. Yeshua did not say that half of all the
people on the earth will be saved, when He had already said in His sermon on
the mount that “few” would be saved (Matt 7:14). Yeshua did not say that the
ones “taken” are taken to heaven and the ones left are “left behind” to
endure the great tribulation. The context is of the Day of the Lord, so the
ones taken are simply removed from the line of fire.

What is
the significance of the analogies of two men and two women being separated
in contrast with Noah’s flood? Flood waters are not discriminating. Noah’s family was
only saved by being in the ark. On the Day of the Lord, the living believers
will be plucked from the earth and the ones left behind will be destroyed by
fire (cf. Ps 11:6).

Each of these brief vignettes is
remarkably parallel to the harvest or gathering parables found in Matthew
3:12 and 13:24-50. All of the stories start with a group that is then
divided, with one part of the group being removed from the rest of the
group. It seems reasonable that the pattern established in the harvest
parables would hold true in the Olivet Discourse, including the timing of
the event. The context of the Olivet Discourse clearly places the
“taking” and “leaving” after the great tribulation. If the “taking”
refers to rapturing saints, then it must be a restatement of the gathering
of the saints described in Matthew 24:31 (cf. Mark 13:27).

"And you know what restrains him now, so that
in his time he will be revealed For the mystery of lawlessness is already
at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the
way."

Pretribulationists assume that
when Yeshua raptures the Church He will remove the Holy Spirit in order for
the Antichrist to appear, based on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7. John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), reputed father of
dispensationalism and author of the pre-tribulation theory, plainly declared in his commentary on 2
Thessalonians Chapter Two that after the Rapture the “Holy Ghost as
the Comforter is no longer dwelling here below.” Cyrus Scofield famed
author of the Scofield Reference Bible, attempted to distinguish
between the “Holy Spirit in the church” and the “Holy Spirit in the
world” (note on 2 Thessalonians 2:3). However, if the Holy Spirit only
performs His role through the church and the church is not present, then
by his interpretation there can be no active presence and power of the
Holy Spirit in the world during the “tribulation period.” Another moderating view
is that the sealing activity of the Holy Spirit is performed on the
converts who accept Yeshua during the period of the church’s absence.

It seems very strange to this writer that the presence of the Holy Spirit
has not restrained any previous world dictator in history nor the
persecution of God’s people, so why should the Holy Spirit be suddenly
removed so this last despot can make his appearance? Actually, Paul makes
no explicit reference to the Holy Spirit in these verses. While the Holy
Spirit may depart individuals (cf. Num 14:42-43; Josh 7:12; Judg 16:20; 1
Sam 16:14), the whole notion that any part of God's universe could ever be
void of His Spirit, which is His presence, is utterly impossible. There
simply is no Scriptural evidence that God’s Spirit ever has or ever shall
literally depart in any partial or complete sense from any part of His
universe (cf. Ps 139:7-12). And wherever the Spirit of the Lord is, God’s
grace and mercy are available.

The concept of removing the Holy
Spirit is devastating to the gospel, which asserts the indispensable role
of the Holy Spirit in conviction of sin, justification, regeneration,
sanctification and other spiritual graces (John 3:5,
6, 8; 6:63; 14:17, 26; 15:26; 16:13; Romans 8:2, 5, 9, 15; 15:16;
1 Corinthians 2:14; 6:11; 12:3; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Galatians 4:6, 29;
5:18, 22; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; Titus 3:5; and 1 Peter 1:2; 1 John
3:24; 4:13.). The report of apostolic ministry detailed in Acts also demonstrates that
successful ministry depends utterly on the work of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5,
8; 2:4; 4:8, 31; 5:32; 6:3, 5; 7:55; 8:17, 29, 39; 9:17; 10:38, 44-45;
11:12, 16, 17, 24; 13:2-4, 9, 52; 15:8, 28; 16:6-7; 19:21; 20:22-23;
21:4, 11). Without the Holy Spirit how could the Father expect anyone to be convicted
of sin when the angel proclaims the “eternal gospel” for the last time
(Rev 14:6-7)? Without the Holy Spirit what is left is “another gospel”
that would rely on legalistic works to achieve salvation.

The original Greek of
2 Thessalonians 2:7 says, “to gar mustêrion êdê energeitai tês anomias
monon o katechōn arti eōs ek mesou genêtai,” which Marshall's
interlinear translates literally as "only the restraining (or the
restraining one) just now until out of the midst it comes” (Marshall,
ad. loc.). There are two key words in the verse that argue against the
pretribulationist theory. First, the verb normally translated as "taken
out of" is genêtai, the aorist middle subjunctive of the verb
ginomai, which means to come to be, become or originate [BAG, 157]. When the English word “taken” is used to translate ginomai in the
rest of the apostolic writings it is normally in the sense of an event taking place. If
the apostle wanted to convey the notion of taking “away” the Greek word
airō, which does include that meaning, would seem to be more
appropriate.

Second, the word translated as “way” in
standard versions is mesos, which means midst, middle, or center
(BAG). The only other translation of mesos as “way” in the
apostolic writings is Colossians 2:14 where it is used in the sense of taking out of
everyone’s sight or out of the midst of everyone (and there airō is
used instead of ginomai).

Pretribulationists assume that “way” means
“earth,” but why didn't Paul say "earth" if he meant "earth?" While the
literal rendering of the Greek sentence may sound strange, it must mean
that the spirit of the Antichrist is being restrained in the abyss, or
bottomless pit (at the center of the earth), and one day the evil spirit
will be released to possess the future man of sin (cf. Rev 13:11; 17:8). Commentaries on 2 Thessalonians I have surveyed offer no cogent
explanation based on Greek grammar why eōs ek mesou genêtai should
be translated “taken out of the way.”

It is also difficult to believe
that the rabbinic trained Apostle Paul would speak of this theoretical
leaving in such a clumsy manner as translated by standard English
versions. Even if the translation of the standard versions were
preferred, the meaning would still be that the Antichrist is being
restrained (2 Thess 2:6) and someday the restraint on the Antichrist will
cease. Rosenthal’s suggestion that “taken out of the way” means “step aside”
(257) is
made without citing any Greek authority, making his reasoning that Michael
the Archangel is the “restrainer” a forced interpretation not adequately
supported by the actual text of 2 Thessalonians or Revelation.

To summarize, the whole prophecy in
2 Thessalonians 2:3-12 is about the coming of the Antichrist, not the
leaving of the Holy Spirit, and 2 Thessalonians 2:7 confirms the
prophecy of Revelation 11:7 that the beast will come from the abyss.

What does the word "first" mean? It means
that nothing comes before it or it wouldn't be called "first." The first
President was George Washington. There was no President before him;
that's why he's called the first President. Let's consider two
significant uses of "first."

In 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the Apostle Paul
stated that the dead in the Lord will rise or be raptured first
before the living. That is, there will be no rapture of the living until
the dead are resurrected. Revelation 20:5 speaks of the first
resurrection and the verse just before it identifies those who participate
in it. The first persons resurrected are identified as those beheaded for their
testimony and those who had refused to worship the beast or receive the
mark of the beast. It's difficult to comprehend how people raptured
before the tribulation and enjoying heaven could be beheaded by the beast.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Paul says, "Let no one
deceive you, for it [the parousia in verse 1 and the Day of the
Lord in verse 2] will not come unless the apostasy comes first and
the man of lawlessness is revealed." This passage can only mean that
before the parousia occurs, which is when the first resurrection
occurs, the man of lawlessness or Antichrist must first be revealed and
carry out his idolatrous activity.

What does the word last mean? It means
that nothing comes after it or it wouldn't be called last. With regard to
end time events we find the word last used two ways:

In 1 Corinthians 15:51 the Apostle Paul says
that the resurrection will take place at the “last trumpet.” This must
mean there is more than one trumpet. The book of Revelation identifies
seven trumpets which signal key events in the end time drama. Revelation
11:15 recounts the sounding of the seventh, or last, trumpet which signals
the beginning of the Lord's reign. In verse 18, God's wrath and the
reward of the saints are viewed as coincidental events, both of which
occur after or at the sounding of the last trumpet.

Jews divided time into the present age and the
age to come when Messiah would rule. In John 6:39 & 40 Yeshua says that He will
raise up (resurrect) those who believe in Him on the “last day.” The last
day must be called last because there aren't any days after it in the
present age. When
Yeshua returns the age to come will commence. The last day wouldn't be last
if there were 3½ or 7 years of the tribulation following it.

One of the puzzles in the study of the
Second Coming and related events is the relation of the prophecy of Peter
to the chronology of Revelation. Peter views the Parousia, or the
Lord’s coming, and the Day of the Lord as coincidental events (2 Pet 3:4,
10; cf. 2 Thess 2:1-2) and asserts,

“But the day of the Lord will come like a
thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements
will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be
burned up. Since all things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of
people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and
hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heaven will
be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat!” (2 Pet 3:10-12)

Pretribulationists usually associate the “coming as a thief” metaphor (v.
10) with the secret rapture. However, since Peter says the heavens
will pass away with a roar on the Day of the Lord, the thief metaphor
cannot incorporate secrecy. That would be like saying you can have a
quiet explosion. In addition, the idiom of the thief metaphor (cf. Matt 24:43; 1 Thess
5:2,4; 2 Pet 3:10; Rev 3:3) always points to the suddenness and unexpected
nature of God’s destruction of His enemies, not the gathering and
salvation of the saints. In other words, His coming in judgment will
occur without any prior warning.
The fact that the thief metaphor is used in connection with the Day of the
Lord means that it does not occur at a different time than the rapture of
the saints.

In addition, Peter emphasizes
three times that on the Day of the Lord the earth and the heavens will be
destroyed by burning
(2 Pet 3:7, 10, 12; cf. Isa 51:6), followed by God’s provision of new
heavens and a new earth (2 Pet 3:13). Yet, in Revelation the new heaven
and new earth appear a thousand years after the Second Coming of
Yeshua. Revelation twice describes the old earth and heavens as “passing
away,” just as Peter, yet only after the thousand-year millennium (Rev
20:11; 21:1). Peter says nothing about a millennial reign. The
prophecies in Revelation depict horrendous devastation on the earth from
the trumpet and bowl plagues, but the destruction of the old earth and
heavens are described in tame language compared to Peter: “fled away” in
Revelation 20:11 and “passed away” in 21:1. In actuality, the problem may
lie with our English translations and reading too much into Peter’s
descriptions.

The account of the destruction of the
heavens and the earth in 2 Peter 3:10 need not refer to an obliteration of
the earth’s existence. The meaning of the key Greek words used in this
verse needs to be carefully considered.

· The verb “will pass away” (Grk.
parerchomai)
literally means to pass by, to come to an end or to disappear, and is
also used in Matthew 5:18 and 24:35 (also parallels in Mark 13:31; Luke
21:33) to refer to the heaven and earth passing away (BAG).

· The word “elements” (Grk.
stoicheion)
had four basic uses in the first century. It referred to (1) the elements of
learning, such as the alphabet, or fundamental principles; (2) elemental
substances from which everything is made and of which it is composed,
i.e. the four elements of nature (earth, air, fire and water); (3) the
elementary forms of religion or syncretistic religious tendencies; and
(4) the heavenly bodies (BAG). Rienecker also suggests that it may refer to the atomic particles that
are the basic structure of nature (II, 435). While Greek philosophers
speculated on the hidden structure of matter, it is hardly likely that
such a meaning was intended by the Lord or Peter. The common usage of
stoicheion in the first century stressed the design of nature, that all
things function in some kind of order.

· The verb “destroyed” (Grk.
luō)
literally means “to loose.” It has many applications in the apostolic
writings,
including breaking up of a constructed structure (John 2:19) and as a
root word for divorce (Matt 19:3). In its strongest usages luō
can mean to destroy, abolish, bring to an end or do away with, meaning
that the component parts come apart (BAG).

· The participle “with intense heat” (Grk.
kausoō) means to be consumed by heat or to burn up (BAG). Rienecker notes that it may be intended to denote a blaze
arising from internal heat, such as a volcano (II, 436f).

· The verb “will be burned up”
is applied to the “earth and its works.” The earth, of course, has no
works, so the phrase is a euphemism for humanity and all that man has
built in recorded history (cf. 1 Cor 3:13ff; 2 Pet 3:4). The Textus Receptus (on which the KJV is based) has
katakaiō,
meaning burned up, burned down or consumed by fire (BAG) but
the Nestle Greek Text (followed by modern versions) has heuriskō,
which means to find or discover (BAG).

· The word “earth” (Grk.
gê) was used to
refer to the soil or ground, the land in contrast to the ocean, the
earth in contrast to the heavens and the inhabited globe (BAG).

To associate Peter’s prophecy with the
heaven and earth “fleeing away” in Revelation 20:11, or “passing away” in
Revelation 21:1, creates a serious complication in the meaning of the term
“Day of the Lord.” All biblical prophecies treat the Day of the
Lord as a singular event. In the same way there cannot be a Second Coming
and a thousand years later a “second” Second Coming. Peter’s description of the Day of the Lord coincides with the vision given
to John of the desolation that God brings on the earth in the seventh bowl
of wrath, using the tectonic and volcanic forces of the earth to destroy
and then to reshape its land surface into a plain as alluded to in
Revelation 20:9. The earth as we know it will come to an end at the
Second Coming of Yeshua by fire, just as the earth as Noah knew it for
most of his life came to an end by means of the global flood. Finally,
Peter does not associate the expectation of new heavens and a new earth
with the Day of the Lord, so the separation of these events in Revelation
by a thousand years is consistent with Peter’s teaching.

“But when the Son of Man comes in His glory,
and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. All
the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from
one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats and He
will put the sheep on His right and the goats on the left.” (Matt
25:31-46)

At the beginning of the parable the
sheep and the goats of the nations are apparently mixed just as in the
harvest parables. However, in this parable Yeshua provides a summary
transcript of the trial or judgment that results in separation, reward and
punishment of the flock. It should be noted that the gathering of the
nations takes place when Yeshua comes in His glory with His angels, which
according to His earlier explanation in Matthew 24:29-31 occurs after the
great tribulation.

The scene would be thus: "these brothers
of mine" (v. 40) are in the background or to the side of the throne. In
front of Yeshua are the "nations," which in normal apostolic parlance refers to
Gentiles. Yeshua said that the nations are separated "as" sheep from
goats, a Hebrew metaphor referring to the house of Israel (Ezek 34:17). He does not say that the "sheep" are His sheep in the sense of John 10:4,
although they might be the "other sheep" of John 10:16. In the context of
the judgment they become His sheep by virtue of how they treated "his
brothers" (v. 40). Thus, being in the world they would not understand
the concept of the unity of the Body of Messiah and the identification of
the Lord with His disciples (Acts 9:4-5; 1 Corinthians 12:27; Ephesians
1:22-23)
and they do not "see" Yeshua in their acts of charity (Matt 25:37, 44). The
apostles strongly emphasized doing charitable acts for God’s people
(Gal 6:10; James 2:14-17; 1 John 3:16-17; cf. Deut 15:7-8).

Charity
toward the poor of the world should not be done because one “sees”
Yeshua in them (because Yeshua is not “in them;” He is only in His
disciples), but because the gospel was intended for the poor (Luke
4:18; 6:20; 7:22) and the nature of righteousness inherently involves
care for the needs of others (Matt 6:1-4; 19:21; Luke 12:33; 14:13;
19:8-9).
By caring for His poverty-stricken, homeless and imprisoned brothers,
the "sheep" of the nations identify with the Shepherd and receive His
commendation as in the cases of Roman centurions who performed charitable
acts for Jews (Matt 8:4-10; Luke 7:1-5; Acts 10:1-2; cf. Matt 10:40-42; Rom
8:29). Conversely, the "goats" of the nations aided and abetted the
persecution and thus deny the Lord.

“These brothers of mine” can only have three
meanings in the apostolic writings: (1) The siblings of Yeshua in the flesh (Mark 3:22;
Acts 1:14); (2) His native countrymen, i.e., other Jews, including His
disciples (Matt 28:10; John 20:17; Acts 3:22), and (3) those who believe
in Yeshua and are obedient to the will of God (Matt 12:50; Rom 7:4). Since the first usage of “brothers” does not fit the parable’s overall
story, the other two definitions yield two possible interpretations. First, the Lord is rewarding and punishing Gentiles on the basis of how
they have treated God’s chosen people (cf. Gen 12:3). The second
interpretation is that the judgment of those who have not accepted the
Gospel, whether Jew or Gentile, is made on the basis of how they treat
believers in Messiah, whether Jew or Gentile (Stern 77).

Since the context of
the parable is the Second Coming and related events, then the trial
probably depicts God doing justice for the great tribulation martyrs (cf.
Rev 6:9-11; 7:14-17; 17:6; 18:4-6, 20; 19:15, 20; 20:4). During the great
tribulation there will likely be many sympathetic to the plight of
Christians and Jews and do whatever possible to provide aid in the face of
the beast’s persecution. Those who ignore, accept or support the beast’s
injustice will be treated as accessories to the crime.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and
Other Early Christian Literature. trans. W.F. Arndt & F.W.
Gingrich. of Walter Bauer's Greek-German Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. The University of Chicago
Press, 1957.